tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1575603731696062553.post5818130053570612077..comments2018-05-21T06:55:34.824-05:00Comments on The Great Change: The Sheer WallAlbert Bateshttps://plus.google.com/102133440341229405901noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1575603731696062553.post-12348563108237010012017-03-29T13:02:48.812-05:002017-03-29T13:02:48.812-05:00Could this be mainstream science&#39;s initial ink...Could this be mainstream science&#39;s initial inkling of the role of soil-building in climate mitigation? http://climatenewsnetwork.net/soil-microbes-key-climate-puzzle/<br />I hope there remains enough social cohesion to allow time to follow up on this insight towards implementing new agricultural practices as urgent needs arise. On the other hand, if there isn&#39;t much social capacity, we won&#39;t be burning fossil fuels anymore either. Or destroying ourselves with nukes and geo-engineering. I hardly know which to hope for. It does seem like climate change will cancel out continuing emissions eventually.Susan Butlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03356002425683740852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1575603731696062553.post-74754513051444746852017-03-23T06:01:40.047-05:002017-03-23T06:01:40.047-05:00Yes! The time is now and we have all we need to ge...Yes! The time is now and we have all we need to get started, even finish the job. What are we doing sitting around on our hands when we could be fixing something? Let&#39;s jump it!<br /><br />I get off where we return to concerns about the baddies of business. Forget it. We can fix a lot in the world for billions of people without business at all. Let’s be Benthamites and fight for the greatest good for the greatest number. Let’s get our heads out of the developed world and focus on the world’s 5.4 billion poorest people who already suffer from climate change. We have the expertise and tools to improve billions of lives. Why worry about a new mission statement for big business?<br /><br />If we start by viewing the world from the perspective of, say, the poorest 2.54 billion things look really different. Who needs sustainable development? Any development understood as anything better than what they&#39;ve got? The 40% of the world&#39;s population at the bottom on the pyramid.<br /><br />Can we help them sustainably? We can. Would providing them low cost, low-tech, no consultants required solutions improve their lives? You bet. Would it reduce wear on the environment? Oh, yes. Anything times 2.54 billion is a big number. Do a little good 2.54 billion times, you get lots of goodness. Do a little bad 2.54 billion times, the damage the poor do to the planet adds up fast. Consider crop waste burning. So what if Joe Micro Farmer has only 1,000 m2 of land? 2.54 billion Farmer Joes together burn 254,000,000 ha of crop waste! Those folks who think only about business forget that the poor damage the environment and themselves, too.<br /><br />We can reverse this damage now with stuff we’ve got.<br /><br />Example: the conservative estimate is that 50% of developing world crop waste is burned. If you apply this to the biggest 25 developing countries&#39; corn, rice, soy, and wheat waste, you get 700 million tons burned annually. The eCO2 product of the methane and NOx generated by burning this 50% of the waste from 4 crops in 25 countries is 758 million tons. This is slightly less than Germany&#39;s annual contribution and puts developing world farmers in 7th place among emitters. Add a few more crops and countries, emissions move Joe Farmer’s friends into a class with India.<br /><br />We do not need a new worldview to settle this; better we help the billions whose lives can be improved by learning how to biochar not burn.<br /><br />Then there’s the underlying premise of the &quot;worldview-as-way-to-change-business&quot;. I have never met a businessman moved by such arguments. Profit and shareholder equity are the only two things that matter. Any effort to change this business credo (especially if it assumes that their current credo is the source of global evil) will not work and will engender unnecessary push back. <br /><br />Alternative? Get them to buy in. Because they care about profits and shareholder equity, they can be made into agents of sustainability. If your company&#39;s future depends on sustainability today, sustainability becomes a key part of business development, not an afterthought in CSR. Making this case will be your job; agroindustrial and mining companies are not tech startups and tend toward sclerotic not flexible. But hey, you’re saving the earth!<br /><br />As they said in the ‘30s, you rob banks because that’s where the money is. If one AgCo can be convinced that there’s green in investing in greening an aspect of business operations, the environmental benefits will go on forever – and make the rest of us look like pikers in the planet saving stakes.<br />Michael Shaferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15301355475894306296noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1575603731696062553.post-56730786915123036412017-03-12T08:10:48.622-05:002017-03-12T08:10:48.622-05:00Very surprised that the British Commonwealth is st...Very surprised that the British Commonwealth is still alive. I am delighted to read the good work it is now doing to tackle the existential crisis of ecocide and climate change. As a Irish citizen, I have to ask why the moniker British is still used. I love the concept of a commonwealth transcending boundaries north and south but what chance has it when a colonial past is still celebrated or legitimized in the term British. Ireland does not belong to the British Commonwealth and can never be for age old reasons. But we could join a new Commonwealth dedicated to planetary goals - one celebrating a potential life affirming future not of a shameful past. EOShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06265834093996647069noreply@blogger.com